such cattle, after deducting a fair allowance for the time and trouble required in effecting a sale. If the cattle, when discovered, are mangled, swollen, and bruised, the plaintiff is not required to dispose of their bodies to entitle him to recover their full value.2 If animals killed are used or given away by plaintiff, the value of the carcass should be deducted. But it is not necessary to a recovery by the owner of an animal maimed that he should surrender it to the company, but he can recover only to the extent of the injury done. The plaintiff is not entitled to interest on the value of the stock from the date of the injury. If the evidence shows willful mischief or gross negligence, or both, the jury may find such punitive or exemplary damages as the case justifies, otherwise not. Exemplary damages are proper where the evidence shows gross negligence or a wanton and reckless disposition on the part of its agents to injure or destroy the plaintiff's property." If the verdict is in excess of the real injury, it will be set aside. But aliter if it is only slightly in excess of the amount at which the court would have assessed the damages. Statutes allowing double damages against railroads for the killing of stock by failing to fence their tracks have been held constitutional,10 and, again, unconstitutional." A statute rendering railroads liable for cattle killed by them, at a valuation to be conclusively fixed by appraisers, is uncon

1 Dean v. R. R. Co., 43 Wis. 305.

2 Rockford etc. R. R. Co. v. Lynch, 67 Ill. 149.

3 Case v. R. R. Co., 75 Mo. 668. Jackson v. R. R. Co., 74 Mo.

526.

5 Meyer v. R. R. Co., 64 Mo. 543; Dean v. R. R. Co., 43 Wis. 305; Toledo etc. R. R. Co. v. Johnston, 74 Ill. 83.

Vicksburg etc. R. R. Co. v. Patton, 31 Miss. 197; 66 Am. Dec. 552; Toledo etc. R. R. Co. v. Johnston, 74 Ill. 83.

9

7 Vicksburg etc. R. R. Co. v. Patton, 31 Miss. 156; 66 Am. Dec.

552.

8 Toledo etc. R. R. Co. v. Arnold, 43 Ill. 418.

9 Rockford etc. R. R. Co. v. Heflin, 65 Mo. 366.

10 Treadway v. R. R. Co., 43 Iowa, 527; Humes v. R. R. Co., 82 Mo. 221; 52 Am. Rep. 369; Mo. Pac. R. R. Co. v. Humes, 114 U. S. 512; Spealman v. R. R. Co., 71 Mo. 434.

11 Atchison etc. R. R. Co. v. Baty, 6 Neb. 37; 29 Am. Rep. 356.

stitutional, as denying the right to a trial by jury.1 An Illinois statute allowing the plaintiff to recover a reasonable attorney's fee for the prosecution of his suit against the company, in addition to the damages sustained, has been held valid. A Kansas statute to the same effect has been sustained."

1 Graves v. R. R. Co., 5 Mont. 556; 51 Am. Rep. 81.

2 Peoria etc. R. R. Co. v. Duggan, 109 Ill. 537; 50 Am. Rep. 619.

3 Kansas Pac. R. R. Co. v. Mower, 16 Kan. 573; Atchison etc. R. R. Co. v. Harper, 19 Kan. 529.

TITLE XVIII.

SHIPS AND SHIPPING.

160

§ 1420.

Title to ships - How acquired - Bills of sale - Registration.

The master - His duties, rights, and powers.

§ 1425.

The master-His duties, rights, and powers-In cases of necessity

Supercargoes.

§ 1428.

§ 1429.

The seamen

§ 1430.

§ 1431.

§ 1432.

The seamen - Rights and duties of - Contracts with.

- Right to wages.

The seamen What is and what is not a forfeiture of wages.
Pilots-Rights and duties of Tows.

Liability for repairs and supplies.

§ 1433. Employment of ship— General ship — Common carrier.

§ 1434. Employment of ship - Charter-party - Hiring of ship. Collisions.

§ 1435.

§ 1443. The admiralty jurisdiction - Torts and matters on the high seas.

§ 1419. Ships and Vessels - What are.- Ships and vessels are personal property. In nautical language a ship is a particular kind of a three-masted vessel, but